CleverDevils2 AAR

Share your glorious victories and ignominious defeats with the rest of the EIA community here.

Moderator: MOD_EIA

Post Reply
gwheelock
Posts: 563
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 1:25 am
Location: Coon Rapids, Minnesota

RE: CleverDevils2 AAR

Post by gwheelock »

Ok; here is the results for the rest of May, 1805 :

Turkey (AGAIN!) makes successful breakin on Cairo & (AGAIN!!!) loses the city combat.

Prussia loses 3 M to forage in Stettin

Britain attacks garrisons in La Havre & Saint-Malo making successful breakins
in both. Fleet in La Havre attempts to run blockade; fails & is scuttled.
Fleet in Saint-Malo attempts to run blockade, succeeds & subsequently
retreats to Cherbourg. (This is a bug & is reported in the Tech Support forum)
Casulties : 2 British Light ships; 1 French Heavy ship from Saint-Malo & 6 from
scuttled La Havre fleet.

The bug is that BLOCKADING fleet should get windgadge & didn't. British had
sufficient ships to guarentee tie given windgadge advantage (& thus win the
combat & force scuttling of Saint-Malo fleet as well.

To correct for this; a deal was made that France will NOT put a garrison in
Cherbourg; Britain will blockade with suffient force to guarentee winning any
combats (even WITH the windgadge bug) & then move the 2 corp that attacked
Saint-Malo to Cherbourg & force out the fleet in the June 1805 turn.

Image
Attachments
eiafrpr13.jpg
eiafrpr13.jpg (193.67 KiB) Viewed 307 times
Guy
gwheelock
Posts: 563
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 1:25 am
Location: Coon Rapids, Minnesota

RE: CleverDevils2 AAR

Post by gwheelock »

Here are the results from the dp phase of June 1805:

Prussia attempts to unconditionally surrender to France. Due to a
program bug; this is not allowed if the national capitol is occupied.
(the bug is that if the national capitol is occupied; the player must
"sue for peace" before exiting the phase & then it doesn't count
UNconditional surrender as a successful "sue" & France is requireing
an unconditional)

Because of this; a deal was reached where France will remove the
garrison from Berlin (this removeing the "required" sue) & Prussia
will then sue in July. France will also "unbesiege" the garrisons in
Stettin; Magdeberg; Wurzberg & Wurttemberg so that Prussia doesn't
lose any more factors & can get as much $ & mp as possible. (I can't
reach the garrison in Posen)

-----

France DOWs Baden - Russia gets control
France DOWs Tuscany - Spain gets control
Austria gets influence in Dalmatia
Austria attemps alliance with Turkey (unsucessful)
Guy
User avatar
Jimmer
Posts: 1968
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2007 9:50 pm

RE: CleverDevils2 AAR

Post by Jimmer »

ORIGINAL: trw2264
Yes, most of Portugal’s fleet was destroyed on a suicide run by GB, but what if GB had not received control of Portugal?
Not technically a suicide run. It blockaded your fleet. If the die rolls had been reversed, you would have been stuck in port, unable to land in Portugal, and GB would have kept it due to the lapse of war. I felt that the potential payoff was worth taking a near-certain loss in the battle.
At LAST! The greatest campaign board game of all time is finally available for the PC. Can my old heart stand the strain?
User avatar
Jimmer
Posts: 1968
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2007 9:50 pm

RE: CleverDevils2 AAR

Post by Jimmer »

ORIGINAL: gwheelock
To correct for this; a deal was made that France will NOT put a garrison in
Cherbourg; Britain will blockade with suffient force to guarentee winning any
combats (even WITH the windgadge bug) & then move the 2 corp that attacked
Saint-Malo to Cherbourg & force out the fleet in the June 1805 turn.
A noble offer from a noble person. In the game as well as in real life. Thanks!
At LAST! The greatest campaign board game of all time is finally available for the PC. Can my old heart stand the strain?
User avatar
Murat
Posts: 803
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2003 9:19 pm
Location: South Carolina

RE: CleverDevils2 AAR

Post by Murat »

ORIGINAL: gwheelock

British had sufficient ships to guarentee tie given windgadge advantage (& thus win the
combat & force scuttling of Saint-Malo fleet as well.

Tie goes the runner, not the blockader.
User avatar
delatbabel
Posts: 1252
Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2006 1:37 am
Location: Sydney, Australia
Contact:

RE: CleverDevils2 AAR

Post by delatbabel »

ORIGINAL: gwheelock

The bug is that BLOCKADING fleet should get windgadge & didn't. British had
sufficient ships to guarentee tie given windgadge advantage (& thus win the
combat & force scuttling of Saint-Malo fleet as well.

To correct for this; a deal was made that France will NOT put a garrison in
Cherbourg; Britain will blockade with suffient force to guarentee winning any
combats (even WITH the windgadge bug) & then move the 2 corp that attacked
Saint-Malo to Cherbourg & force out the fleet in the June 1805 turn.

This is very gentlemanly, but why doesn't France just agree to voluntarily scuttle the fleet in his next reinforcement phase? That's allowed in the EiA rules, is it not allowed in EiANW?
--
Del
User avatar
delatbabel
Posts: 1252
Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2006 1:37 am
Location: Sydney, Australia
Contact:

RE: CleverDevils2 AAR

Post by delatbabel »

ORIGINAL: Murat
Tie goes the runner, not the blockader.

No, I don't think so. Ties in naval combat always go to the defender. In this case the defender is the blockader, and so should win ties. In this case, despite the fact that the combat occurs in the GB turn, the attacker is France because it is his fleets that are moving to try to end the blockade.
6.3.4.1 DETERMINING VICTORY: ... If both sides have surviving ships and losses were equal, the side that attacked loses the naval combat and the other side wins it.

(I still think the default action when a port is attacked and is blockaded should be to scuttle the fleet without a combat, because that's what most normal EiA players do, but that's another argument).
--
Del
gwheelock
Posts: 563
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 1:25 am
Location: Coon Rapids, Minnesota

RE: CleverDevils2 AAR

Post by gwheelock »

ORIGINAL: delatbabel

ORIGINAL: gwheelock

The bug is that BLOCKADING fleet should get windgadge & didn't. British had
sufficient ships to guarentee tie given windgadge advantage (& thus win the
combat & force scuttling of Saint-Malo fleet as well.

To correct for this; a deal was made that France will NOT put a garrison in
Cherbourg; Britain will blockade with suffient force to guarentee winning any
combats (even WITH the windgadge bug) & then move the 2 corp that attacked
Saint-Malo to Cherbourg & force out the fleet in the June 1805 turn.

This is very gentlemanly, but why doesn't France just agree to voluntarily scuttle the fleet in his next reinforcement phase? That's allowed in the EiA rules, is it not allowed in EiANW?

Because there were also pp gains/losses that need to be corrected. This won't
completely correct them; but it's the best idea I could come up with.
Guy
gwheelock
Posts: 563
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 1:25 am
Location: Coon Rapids, Minnesota

RE: CleverDevils2 AAR

Post by gwheelock »

ORIGINAL: delatbabel


I still think the default action when a port is attacked and is blockaded should be to scuttle the fleet without a combat, because that's what most normal EiA players do, but that's another argument).

Yah; most players do that because they are -probably- going to lose the breakout
attempt; lose a pp for that; then have to scuttle anyway & lose ANOTHER pp.

The problem is that EIA gave f2f players the option (& some decided to take the
chance). To speed up the game (reduce the pbem back-&-forth); Marshall intentionally
changed this so that there is no pp loss for the scuttle after combat. This means that
the correct action for the defender is ALWAYS attempt to break out because there
is no downside & he may at least cost the attacker a ship or two.
Guy
User avatar
Jimmer
Posts: 1968
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2007 9:50 pm

RE: CleverDevils2 AAR

Post by Jimmer »

ORIGINAL: Murat

ORIGINAL: gwheelock

British had sufficient ships to guarentee tie given windgadge advantage (& thus win the
combat & force scuttling of Saint-Malo fleet as well.

Tie goes the runner, not the blockader.
Nope. I've tested this exhaustively: The blockader wins all ties.

There is a nebulous statement in the rules that can be interpretted two ways. I can't reproduce it from here, but it boils down to the difference between interceptions and blockades. I think the person who wrote the rules intended to say that the blockader wins the ties (because that was in the original rules), but it had to be changed due to the wording "phasing stack". Anyhow, the rules state wins and losses in the section on regular interceptions. In a regular interception, the phasing player wins ties. But, there's a small clause somewhere that makes blockades not be interceptions (or, something like that).

NOTE: I'm not sure whether this includes attempts to run the blockade from the sea zone. I didn't test that.
At LAST! The greatest campaign board game of all time is finally available for the PC. Can my old heart stand the strain?
User avatar
Jimmer
Posts: 1968
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2007 9:50 pm

RE: CleverDevils2 AAR

Post by Jimmer »

ORIGINAL: delatbabel

ORIGINAL: gwheelock

The bug is that BLOCKADING fleet should get windgadge & didn't. British had
sufficient ships to guarentee tie given windgadge advantage (& thus win the
combat & force scuttling of Saint-Malo fleet as well.

To correct for this; a deal was made that France will NOT put a garrison in
Cherbourg; Britain will blockade with suffient force to guarentee winning any
combats (even WITH the windgadge bug) & then move the 2 corp that attacked
Saint-Malo to Cherbourg & force out the fleet in the June 1805 turn.

This is very gentlemanly, but why doesn't France just agree to voluntarily scuttle the fleet in his next reinforcement phase? That's allowed in the EiA rules, is it not allowed in EiANW?
Because there was a 3 point political swing in France's favor as a result of the errant combat. GB should have collected +2, but actually wound up at -1. France should have disgorged -2, but instead gained +1.

This won't be perfect, but it will at least move things a little closer to what they should be.

I'm going to change the naval setups for the future, to take this bug into account. But, it will be hard to do it. Takes a lot more ships when you don't have wind guage.
At LAST! The greatest campaign board game of all time is finally available for the PC. Can my old heart stand the strain?
User avatar
Jimmer
Posts: 1968
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2007 9:50 pm

RE: CleverDevils2 AAR

Post by Jimmer »

8.8 Fleets of a major power that are at war with blockading fleets may attempt to leave that port (run the blockade) but will be automatically intercepted by the blockading enemy major power’s stack.

9.3.1 Determining Victory

A side that does not lose all of its ships and also loses fewer ships than the other side wins a naval combat and the other side loses it.

In naval combat by initiation: if both sides have surviving ships and losses were equal, the side that attacked (phasing side) loses the naval combat and the other side (non-phasing side) wins it.

In naval combat by interception: if both sides have surviving ships and losses were equal, the side that attacked (phasing side) wins the naval combat.

This is the rule pair that introduces the ambiguity. 8.8 says that running a blockade causes the blockader to automatically "intercept".

Then, in 9.3.1, it says the side that attacked (phasing side) wins if by interception.

Technically, this should imply that the phasing side wins all ties. However, this isn't the way it works, and it's not the way it SHOULD work, either, at least in reference to the old rules. The attacker has to break out. The blockader is NOT the attacker (although, I'm sure the French disagree :)). The fleet attempting to leave the port is attacking.
At LAST! The greatest campaign board game of all time is finally available for the PC. Can my old heart stand the strain?
User avatar
zaquex
Posts: 368
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 11:46 pm
Location: Vastervik, Sweden
Contact:

RE: CleverDevils2 AAR

Post by zaquex »

6.3.1.1 NAVAL ATTACKERIDEFENDER DETERMINATION: If there is more than one enemy major power present, the "attacker" decides which will be the "defender". The attacker is the phasing side if 6.2.4 applies or the non-phasing intercepting side if the combat is caused by an interception (see 6.2.3). The defender (at the attacker's option) comprises any one defender's stack that is present.

The intercepting fleet is always the attacker and blockading fleet always intercepts a waring fleet trying to leave a port. Therefore the program is correct in giving the blockading fleet the win if a tie.
An Elephant
User avatar
Jimmer
Posts: 1968
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2007 9:50 pm

RE: CleverDevils2 AAR

Post by Jimmer »

It's possible we played this wrong in the past. I'm reading the original rules, and they would seem to indicate that the blockader is the attacker.
 
I remember distinctly a rule somewhere that said the intercepting stack is the attacker unless the combat is in a blockade box, but I can't find it now.
 
As it is worded in the EiANW rulebook, it would seem that the blockading fleet LOSES ties. However, this is not the way the computer does it. Further, I would lobby against changing the program, because I'm pretty sure we found an official source that told us "blockader wins ties".
 
If the way the computer plays it is reversed, it will make it MUCH tougher for GB to even have a chance at winning. No matter what GB does in setup, France is favored to break out of at least one port. GB simply doesn't have enough ships to blockade all of France's forces.
At LAST! The greatest campaign board game of all time is finally available for the PC. Can my old heart stand the strain?
gwheelock
Posts: 563
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 1:25 am
Location: Coon Rapids, Minnesota

RE: CleverDevils2 AAR

Post by gwheelock »

Ok; here are the results from the June Land phase

France attacks Russian controlled Baden with Massena & 2 corp
Chits are Esc. Assault vs Esc Counter Attack
Casulties 1 Fr I; 6 Baden I, 1 Baden C

Image

Subsequent breakin attempt was unsuccessful; but the 1 Baden I died on Russian turn.
France assults Florence; successful breakin; Florence garrison surrenders.

Turkey makes successful (AGAIN) breakin roll on Cairo & FINALLY
kills the last 2 Egytian Cav in the corp garrisoning the city.

France unbeseiges Berlin; Stettin; Magdeberg; Wurzberg & Wurrtemberg as per agreement.

France makes unsuccessful breakin attempt on La Havre (La Havre remained a legitimate
target & was not covered by the deal to correct the bug with the Naval blockade combat;
only Saint Malo & Cherbourg were covered under that.

Britain moves 1 British & 1 Swedish corp from Saint Malo to Cherbourg as per agreement.
Attachments
EIAAAR2.jpg
EIAAAR2.jpg (112.1 KiB) Viewed 309 times
Guy
User avatar
Jimmer
Posts: 1968
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2007 9:50 pm

RE: CleverDevils2 AAR

Post by Jimmer »

I wonder how we can tell if the bug is 50/50 or an intermittent bug.
 
Anyhow, the British moved all kinds of stuff around this turn, but did essentially nothing except attack Cherbourg to fulfill the conditions of the agreement.
 
NOTE: If the British do not exit Cherbourg on their naval phase, they are considered fair game. GB is pouting over this, because if they had still been in St. Malo, there was a fletch in that city, making France have to roll higher. :( Waaaaaa! Now I have to leave French soil. Waaaaaaa!
At LAST! The greatest campaign board game of all time is finally available for the PC. Can my old heart stand the strain?
gwheelock
Posts: 563
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 1:25 am
Location: Coon Rapids, Minnesota

RE: CleverDevils2 AAR

Post by gwheelock »

Yes; here is a shot of the current (June 1805) coastal setup.

(& if you are so brokenhearted about leaving French soil; just move
that fleet out of the channel & I'll bring "French" soil to you ... Scotland has
a nice French ring to it >I< think - Le Emperour Napoleon [8D] )

Image
Attachments
EIAAAR3.jpg
EIAAAR3.jpg (203.92 KiB) Viewed 307 times
Guy
gwheelock
Posts: 563
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 1:25 am
Location: Coon Rapids, Minnesota

RE: CleverDevils2 AAR

Post by gwheelock »

OK; at the end of June 1805; the politcal standings are :



Image
Attachments
eiaaar4.jpg
eiaaar4.jpg (56.11 KiB) Viewed 307 times
Guy
gwheelock
Posts: 563
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 1:25 am
Location: Coon Rapids, Minnesota

RE: CleverDevils2 AAR

Post by gwheelock »

And the total VPs are :

Image
Attachments
EIAAAr5.jpg
EIAAAr5.jpg (42.7 KiB) Viewed 307 times
Guy
User avatar
Jimmer
Posts: 1968
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2007 9:50 pm

RE: CleverDevils2 AAR

Post by Jimmer »

See? France is the one to beat, guys. Let's go get 'im! I'll commit my whole army to the task, anyhow.
At LAST! The greatest campaign board game of all time is finally available for the PC. Can my old heart stand the strain?
Post Reply

Return to “After Action Reports”